For kids, the term "gay" is now associated just as much with a dodgy computer as it might be with sexual preference. But does this make it OK?

For those who claim that the word has moved on from unbridled homophobia and that, as the dictum of GCSE English goes, "language is meaning", I would like to agree. Strictly, though, the usage is derogatory and has only a negative connotation about homosexuality; gay is more than just an interchangeable, mild swear word.

So, even though a "gay" computer shifts the term into the abstract, the veneer of acceptability covers up a sinister and all-too pervasive subtext: that being gay is wrong. Indeed, a survey by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers found that 98% of pupils hear homophobic language at school; I just wonder whether the last 2% of the pupils surveyed were deaf.

Homophobia is endemic in our schools; Section 28's repeal hasn't changed this. Stonewall claims it persists because teachers lack confidence in tackling the issue. This is a sad truth, as many - particularly younger - teachers let it pass in an attempt to fit in with their students.

More disturbingly, some teachers (generally older) see nothing wrong with homophobia. A former teacher of mine (who was, incidentally, also a self-confessed fascist) even "joked around" with students using explicitly homophobic jives. Another teacher I knew, who otherwise seemed politically quite sound, disagreed with the repeal of section 28. Teachers challenging homophobia should be integral in school life, as it is with bullying. But when teachers actively promote it, the kids who might challenge prejudice are undermined and don't stand a chance.

And what becomes the cultural norm is insidious. I have never held homophobic views, yet I found myself, as a young teenager, routinely using the term "gay" in a pejorative way. This was, in the most part, because when my friends and I used it at school, we were rarely challenged by teachers.

So, unfortunately, the only way schools can deal with the issue is to challenge this misuse. But the teachers need to be given the confidence to do so. This should be addressed in the same way as racial abuse would be treated: by explicitly making clear that, at every level of the school, homophobic language, and in particular the use of gay as a casual negative, is unacceptable. Only when this happens and is sustained, will the ghost of Section 28 and what went before begin to disappear.